2012 Escalade Esv Platinum Edition Awd Low Mile Simply Like New Below Wholesale! on 2040-cars
Fort Worth, Texas, United States
Cadillac Escalade for Sale
6.0l v8 leather sunroof navigation rear dvd running boards tow package mp3 4x4
2014 cadillac escalade esv platinum awd sunroof nav 15k texas direct auto(US $66,980.00)
2011 cadillac escalade esv platinum awd sunroof nav dvd texas direct auto(US $54,980.00)
4 dr suv automatic gasoline 5.3l 8 cyl sable black(US $9,480.00)
2002 cadillac escalade ext base crew cab pickup 4-door 6.0l(US $9,995.00)
07 cadillac escalade awd gold bose audio 7 passenger rear dvd hitch receiver
Auto Services in Texas
Yale Auto ★★★★★
World Car Mazda Service ★★★★★
Wilson`s Automotive ★★★★★
Whitakers Auto Body & Paint ★★★★★
Wetzel`s Automotive ★★★★★
Wetmore Master Lube Exp Inc ★★★★★
Auto blog
2014 Cadillac XTS Vsport
Mon, 30 Sep 2013Not long after bombing around the Milford Road Course in the new CTS Vsport, Cadillac invited me to try out its other new-for-2014 Vsport model: the XTS. And despite using the same twin-turbocharged 3.6-liter V6 from the CTS, the Vsport package takes on a whole new meaning here in Cadillac's softer flagship.
In the CTS, this trim perfectly bridges the gap between the standard models and the hardcore CTS-V, and is focused on being the best-driving version of the range without a standalone V badge. The XTS, however, has no proper V model, so the Vsport becomes the new range-topper for that line by default. But unlike the CTS Vsport, which uses rear-wheel-drive architecture and is focused on driving dynamics above all, the XTS is geared toward a much different customer.
The entire XTS experience is far more concerned with plush comfort than handling prowess, and while this Vsport model certainly ups the ante with more power and some mild suspension and steering tweaks, it's not exactly what we'd call a particularly engaging experience. But that doesn't mean it isn't good.
GM under fire from safety advocates over braking problem caused by recall fix
Thu, Feb 6 2020Safety experts are lambasting General Motors over what they say is the automaker’s slow notification of owners of certain 2019 sedans and trucks that a recall fix could cause power braking to fail and increase the risk of a crash, the Detroit Free Press reports. GMÂ’s original recall in December targeted about 550,000 Cadillac CT6 sedans and Chevrolet Silverado 1500 and GMC Sierra 1500 pickups, all from the 2019 model year, over potentially defective electronic stability control and antilock brakes. In that case, GM said the errors would not show up as a diagnostic warning on the instrument cluster. But after GM had done recall work on 162,000 vehicles, about 1,700 owner have complained that their power brakes didnÂ’t work after they had the recall done and then used the OnStar app to start their vehicle. GM then issued a supplemental fix for customers whoÂ’d already had their vehicles serviced. In this case, a diagnostic warning should illuminate saying either “Service Brake Assist” or “Service ECS,” which GM says is a signal that a customer should not drive the vehicle and instead call their dealer, which will tow the vehicle and have it repaired. Safety advocates say the automaker hasnÂ’t gone far enough to protect customers. “The fact that you could potentially start a vehicle and not have brakes is a pretty risky proposition,” Sean Kane, president of the Safety Research and Strategies, which works on auto issues for plaintiffs and governmental organizations, told the Freep. “The fact that they wouldnÂ’t notify owners (sooner) is pretty stunning.” GM told the Freep it was required to notify the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and file paperwork before it notified customers about the original recall, which was made Dec. 12. It then had to investigate and resolve the problem created by its original recall fix before alerting customers. GMÂ’s call center and dealers are contacting the remaining 900 customers who havenÂ’t yet had the update made to the original recall repair. GM also hired a vendor to send recall letters to the 550,000 customers affected by the original recall notifying them about the update. There are no known injuries or deaths related to the problem. Read the Freep story here.
Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating
Mon, Aug 6 2018Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.